• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

FakeNews FBI’s “Last Honest Man”, James Comey

JAMES COMEY: FALL OF THE LEGEND

 

by Paul Mirengoff  at PowerLine:

Byron York describes the fall of James Comey. Byron notes that Comey, who presents himself as the Last Honest Man, is now under investigation for possibly mishandling classified and confidential information in his apparently all-consuming desire to get Trump.

The view of Comey as the Last Honest Man was widely shared by mainstream media and among liberals after he faced down top representatives of the Bush administration in thatdramatic encounter at the hospital bed of then-Attorney General Ashcroft. And during the 1990s the view of Comey as a man of integrity, though not the last such man, was almost universal.

I’m not sure when Comey lost the plot, but I suspect the Ashcroft incident was a factor. The adulation he received from the media may have gone to his head.

I give Comey credit, though, for preventing the complete whitewashing of Hillary Clinton’s email-related misdeeds. If, as Andy McCarthy and others plausibly contend, the fix was in on the Hillary investigation from the moment President Obama opined that she was innocent, then Comey’s detailed public discussion of her case provided a huge public service.

Instead of walking away from the scandal unscathed, the result Obama and Loretta Lynch desired, Hillary’s misconduct was laid bare by the director of the FBI. He partially foiled his bosses, and did so knowingly, just as he foiled President Bush and would later partially foil President Trump.

Did Comey believe Hillary committed no crime? I don’t know. In my view, his argument that she was legally innocent is unpersuasive, but not frivolous. Comey might well have believed it, or at least managed to have half convinced himself of its validity.

But the key point is that he pulled rank on the partisan attorney general in order to inform the public that Hillary was skating on something like a technicality, not because she was innocent in any strong sense.

But for his enormous ego, fueled by the Ashcroft incident, I doubt Comey would have attempted this end-run. Thus, Comey’s status as a legend in his own mind served the public good, at least in this instance.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/06/james-comey-legend-and-the-fall.php

Crooked Hillary Backed by Crooked FBI during 2016 Presidential Election

Commentary: For Trump supporters, DOJ IG report amounts to “Told ya so”

by Michael Graham at CBS News:

The new Justice Department inspector general’s report on the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email scandal is 568 pages long, but for Trump supporters it can be reduced to a single phrase:

“Told ya so.”

For months, Team Trump has claimed that the Department of Justice under Barack Obama was motivated by politics when it came to investigating Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  And while some on the Right have stretched that premise out to the “Deep State Conspirators Use UFO Tech To Erase DOJ Data” extreme, the IG report makes it clear that the Loretta Lynch/James Comey/Andrew McCabe DOJ and FBI were far too often motivated by crass partisanship rather than the pursuit of justice.

The report called the actions of two officials “antithetical to the core values” of the FBI and DOJ in this excerpt:

When one senior FBI official, (Peter) Strzok, who was helping to lead the Russia investigation at the time, conveys in a text message to another senior FBI official, (Lisa) Page, that ‘we’ll stop’ candidate Trump from being elected — after other extensive text messages between the two disparaging candidate Trump — it is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects [emphasis added]. This is antithetical to the core values of the FBI and the Department of Justice.

There was also this exchange between FBI employees supposedly practicing impartial law enforcement:

10:51:48, FBI Attorney 2: “I am so stressed about what I could have done differently [regarding Clinton investigation].”
10:54:29, FBI Employee: “Don’t stress. None of that mattered.”
10:54:31, FBI Employee: “The FBI’s influence.”
10:59:36, FBI Attorney 2: “I don’t know. We broke the momentum.”
11:00:03, FBI Employee: “That is not so.”
11:02:22, FBI Employee: “All the people who were initially voting for her would not, and were not, swayed by any decision the FBI put out. Trump’s supporters are all poor to middle class, uneducated, lazy POS that think he will magically grant them jobs for doing nothing [emphasis added]They probably didn’t watch the debates, aren’t fully educated on his policies, and are stupidly wrapped up in his unmerited enthusiasm.”

It goes downhill from there.

Opponents of the president and many in the mainstream media have largely dismissed this notion of an FBI corrupted by partisanship. Much of the media coverage has focused, not on the bad behavior by James Comey, but instead on Trump’s (often over-the-top) criticisms of the FBI, the Justice Department and Special Counsel Rober Mueller.

And that in itself is additional proof of the Trump-supporters’ primary premise that the institutions they are told they should trust—government, media, academia—are no longer trustworthy. Otherwise, how could they ignore such a juicy tale of corruption and scandal?

Start at the beginning: Hillary Clinton, with her history of problematic ethics, becomes secretary of state and, during her tenure, her family simultaneously ran an international foundation that collected hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign governments and businesses. As she’s on her way out the door after four years in office, it’s discovered she was doing classified government business on a personal email with a homebrew server—literally in her basement—and thousands of her emails were “disappeared” using a high-tech firm’s “Bleach Bit” technology.

And that’s just the prequel. Imagine where Shonda Rhimes could go from there.

Actually even Rhimes probably wouldn’t have the audacity to put Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac at the height of the investigation, or allow an FBI agent who literally pledged to stop Donald Trump from becoming president to oversee his case.

FBI agents getting meals, drinks and tickets to sporting events from reporters? Agents sending “vive la resistance” messages making oversight decisions in Trump’s case? Not to mention the new revelation of the 26-year-old New York Times reporter engaged in a romantic relationship with a 57-year-old Senate Intelligence Committee staffer—one of the committees overseeing the RussiaGate probe.

Plot twists like these would be laughed out of a script meeting.

Reading the IG report, one can imagine a MAGA hat-wearing Greek chorus in the background chanting, “If a Republican had done this…..”  Rep. Trey Gowdy, the Republican former prosecutor who has been defending the DOJ and decried attacks on the FBI, raises that very point in his response:

“The treatment afforded to former Secretary Clinton and other potential subjects and targets was starkly different from the FBI’s investigation into Trump campaign officials. Voluntariness and consent in the former were replaced with search warrants, subpoenas, and other compulsory processes in the latter. Many of the investigators and supervisors were the same in both investigations but the investigatory tactics were not.”

In other words, the premise that motivated so many Trump supporters is proven true: The DC Establishment really was out to get Trump.

The actions of the FBI or DOJ may, in the end, be defensible. No legal line may have been crossed.  But for people who elected Donald Trump because they felt like their government viewed them as a problem to be solved and not as citizens to be served, the IG report confirms what they’ve feared all along.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-for-trump-supporters-doj-ig-report/

Justice Department’s Report Still Smells Hillary Rotten at the FBI!

Crime and Punishment

by Conrad Black  at American Greatness:

The Justice Department Inspector General’s report on the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s unsecured personal email server laid bare a widespread pattern of conduct that “cast a cloud” over the FBI. The report incites the inference that the Bureau is a severely corrupted organization, tainted and warped by unconstitutional ambitions to meddle in electoral matters.

Although Inspector General Michael Horowitz asserted he lacked “documentary and testamentary evidence” to prove political bias ruled in making decisions of great political consequence, clearly he did not mean bias was not present. On what the report presented, it is almost certain that the FBI, at the deliberate direction of its leaders and senior Justice Department officials, intervened completely improperly in political matters. The inspector general led the country to the edge of the decision, and will presumably make a number of criminal referrals for possible indictments, as he did after his initial report.

Horowitz is not a prosecutor. But he recorded extreme anti-Trump bias in many people and on many occasions. The presence of Peter Strzok as head of the FBI Clinton whitewash operation, jumping at once to take over the effort to tie Trump to Russia so as to rig the presidential election (though he acknowledged “there is no there there”), and then on to lead Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation of Trump, is scandalous. At mid-point in the circuit, Strzok assures his Justice Department paramour Lisa Page, “We will stop him” (Trump). This makes Horowitz’s pious attachment to inconclusiveness very tenuous.

Former FBI Director James Comey emerges as a psychopath incapable of telling fact from fiction, himself guilty of possible criminal misuse of emails, as well as likely obstruction of justice, untruthful answers to Congress under oath, theft of government property, illegal leaks, and in Horowitz’s words, “usurping” the authority of the attorney general and deputy attorney general, “serious improprieties and errors of judgment,” and severe breach of Bureau practices and policies for “unpersuasive” reasons. He is completely disgraced and is on the low road to indictment.

Comey and his counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, when he was a prosecutor, never accorded any mercy to those whom they gleefully prosecuted, (such as Martha Stewart, Scooter Libby, and me), and it will be a fine divertissement to see how they do when their turn comes to face the lawless rogue monster of American criminal justice. Retaining proportionality, there will be some resemblance to the fate of Robespierre’s chief prosecutor under the Committee of Public Safety, Fouquier-Tinville, and Stalin’s police ministers, Yagoda, Yezhov, and Beria: all were executed when the political currents shifted.

Revelations About Obama
We also learn for the first time that that President Obama was not, as he has claimed, unaware of Secretary Clinton’s illegal email activity, which, Horowitz also confirms, gave “foreign actors” access to unknowable quantities of classified material—a major security breach. There is little doubt that President Obama and his attorney general, Loretta Lynch, and her deputy Sally Yates, were complicit in the harassment of the Trump campaign, including the implantation of informers within the campaign, the surveillance of the campaign through telephone intercepts and other means under a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant requested from a court under a false pretext of treating the Steele dossier, a farrago of lies and defamations commissioned by the Clinton campaign, as an objective product of respectable impartial, professional intelligence gathering with no hint of its origins or methods or purpose.

Comey inherited the FBI from Robert Mueller, who must have inculcated the initial ethos of omnipotence and infallibility. Horowitz reveals many instances of the tangible corruption of FBI agents by interested parties in investigations, and of contact between agents and the media so frequent that it is impossible to identify the principal suspects in the Niagara of illegal leaks the FBI’s agents have committed. Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who has already been referred for possible criminal indictment, got around to recusing himself on the Clinton “matter” a week before the 2016 election, after a Clinton ally had given McCabe’s wife’s Virginia state senate campaign almost $800,000 while McCabe was leading the soft-pointed investigation of Mrs. Clinton.

Somebody serious, meaning no one now in sight in the Justice Department, is going to have to come to grips with the role of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in all this. Obviously, Clinton lied to federal officers. It is inconceivable that Obama did not know a legally damaging amount about this appalling skullduggery. The country needs the truth.

Though Horowitz wasn’t looking at the intelligence agencies, the coordinated law-breaking and perjury of senior officials, almost certainly including the former directors of the FBI, CIA (John Brennan), and the Office of National Intelligence (James Clapper), has to be addressed, starting with their frequent lies to Congress, and apparent participation in a plan with Comey to mislead the president-elect about the Steele dossier. All of this is so far from passing a smell test, no person of normal olfactory sensibilities could inhale through their nostrils while being exposed to it.

We cannot wait for the Horowitz molasses to run for another 18 months—as it did to produce this report—to get to the bottom of the partisan Russian probe, the infamous Steele dossier and the apparent manipulation of the FISA court, a serious crime. The Democrats are trying to run out the clock, and the macabre farce noire of Mueller’s investigation, which returns every few months to launch another feeble assault on Paul Manafort for reasons having nothing to do with its ostensible purpose (Trump-Russian collusion), must not continue ad nauseam et infinitum.

The well-tried Democratic dirty tricks operation is doing its best, one last time, with a contemporaneous spurious civil lawsuit against the Trump Foundation, from the Spitzer-Cuomo-Schneiderman-Underwood legal sewer of the attorney general of New York. The wax-works official Democratic leadership—Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), and their claque—are trying to spin the report as inconclusive and maintain that Comey was more helpful to Trump than to Clinton. The reaction of the new FBI director, Christopher Wray, promising to implement Horowitz’s recommendations and acknowledging errors “in hindsight,” was completely unacceptable. He should have been wearing short pants and a Yogi Bear hat as he promised to “teach” his 35,000 agents to avoid political bias.

The Washington Sleaze Factory Needs to be Upended
The old Washington sleaze factory is talking to itself. We are between the lightning and the thunder and the country cannot tolerate this level of sanctimonious, institutionalized corruption any longer.

It’s now or never for the pitiful, self-emasculated Attorney General Jeff Sessions. He must name a special counsel to get to the bottom of the origins and development of the Russian investigation, while Mueller is ordered to make an interim report, show cause why he should be allowed to continue at all, and if so, his staff must be purged of known political partisans. Its origins and functioning have been arrogantly unprofessional and they are not close to anything relevant to the non-existent Trump-Russia relationship. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is compromised by approving the renewal of an illegal FISA warrant, stonewalling Congress, and buckling to Comey in appointing Mueller right after Comey was fired (on Rosenstein’s recommendation).

Nothing in any of these investigations raises the slightest questions about the probity of the conduct of Donald Trump, who has been the victim of Clintonian chicanery, Sessions’ impotence, and a historic media smear campaign. The president must require the public revelation of all relevant documentation, redacting only what an independent unquestionable source identifies as necessary to keep secret for reasons of the safety of an agent or human asset or national security. Then let the people judge in November.

If Sessions or Rosenstein won’t appoint a new special counsel with a proper mandate and impose reasonable guidelines on Mueller, they should be sacked and the solicitor general, Noel Francisco, should be ordered to do what his superiors have failed to do, pending senatorial approval of replacements.

If Clinton had won, as the leaders of the Justice Department assumed and passionately hoped and tried to assure, none of this would have come to light. If they had just allowed Donald Trump a decent honeymoon, as every other incoming president receives, he would not have overturned the rocks and it all would have slipped into the past. But in confecting and promoting the monstrous fraud of Trump-Russian collusion, they tried, first to subvert a presidential election and then to overturn the result of one. What occurred was a massive criminal assault on the Constitution. The tumor has been ripped open and now it must be excised.

Despite Horowitz’s partial disclaimer, he has almost certainly proved that political bias perverted the administration of justice. Those responsible and complicit must be indicted, convicted, and punished, with the same severity they have shown to their often guiltless victims.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/17/crime-and-punishment/

Rush Limbaugh on Why Crooked Hillary Remains “Holy”

Obama Was the Reason Hillary Wasn’t Prosecuted

by Rush Limbaugh at realclearpolitics:

RUSH: I am gonna pat myself on the back for this, because it has been for years that it has been my opinion — and I’ve shared it with you — that the real reason Hillary Clinton wasn’t prosecuted — and, of course, there are many — one, they didn’t want to harm her; two, they wanted to help her. All that’s true.

But above that, they could not prosecute her, because that would have made it official that Barack Obama had lied, and it’s all about her illegal server. Do you know what we learned in this IG report? We learned that this woman was using unsecured email and an unsecured server on a nongovernment protected email address to email the president of the United States while traveling in foreign countries — and that the president of the United States was responding to her.

The secretary of state and Barack Obama were sending classified emails back and forth while she was in capitals of distant nations, some of whom were our enemies. Totally unsecure and unprotected. It’s outrageous what was going on, this casual, lackadaisical attitude toward security! And, I’m telling you, it can only spring… How in the world can this happen? How can the president of the United States and his secretary of state be so cavalier about their communications, knowing full well that cyber trackers are everywhere, that cyber thieves are everywhere?

How can they be so cavalier about this? The answer has to be in they don’t think there that much about America worth protecting! For crying out loud, do you do everything you can to protect your home? Do you do everything you can to protect your kids? Do you do everything you can to protect your possessions? Why in the world were not the president — Barack Obama — and Hillary Clinton, the secretary of state, likewise trying to protect sensitive information and secrets about their own country?

I’m here to tell you, there’s no way Barack Obama was gonna be demonstrated to have done this because he was lying about it. Obama lied countless times when he said he never knew she was using an illegal server until he saw it and read about it in the media. Let’s go to the audio sound bites just to document this and get it out of the way. March 7, 2015, CBS Sunday Morning, Bill Plante. Whatever happened to Bill Plante? Does anybody know whatever that happened Bill Plante? Did he retire? I haven’t seen Bill Plante in a long time. Anyway, he was interviewing Obama, and during the interview Plante asks about the email controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton.

PLANTE: Mr. President, when did you first learn that Hillary Clinton used an email system outside the U.S. government for, uhh, official business while she was secretary of state?

OBAMA: Uhh, at same time, uh, everybody else learned it through news reports.

RUSH: That’s not true. The IG report now indicates she was sending sensitive information — unsecured — using her private email address to Barack Obama, who knew she was using a private email address. The added injury is while she was traveling! She was doing this from foreign countries where, folks, whether you like to admit it ordained, Americans are monitored and spied on in foreign countries just like we constantly spy on, say, the Russian ambassador, Kislyak. Every time he went to lunch, had a conversation, we were wiretapping him.

They do the same thing with us, and she’s trafficking in unsecure data/information, and Obama is responding while she is in foreign capitals. That’s all you need to know, if you’re asking, “Why was Hillary Clinton exonerated and why was she not prosecuted?” That and that alone. Now, there are other reasons, but that’s paramount, because all of this — everything in that IG report yesterday, everything about the Trump-Russia collusion story, every bit of it — happened when Obama was president! All of this happened while the Obama administration was calling the shots and making things happen.

RUSH: Bob in Caldwell, West Virginia, as we get back to the phones. Great to have you, Bob. How you doing, sir?

CALLER: (garbled cell throughout) Doing well, sir. Thanks for taking my call. Because time is precious, I have about three quick points I’d like to make, if I may. No. 1, I spent over 30 years in the government with classified information and a security clearance. For those of us that take our responsibilities seriously, you can assure you, we find this corruption at the FBI reprehensible, and we vote. That’s the point. The next point I’d like to make, you believe there’s two issues that don’t get enough attention or even people are aware of.

One of them is called the “original classification authority,” and President Obama designated the secretary of each department with this authority. Under that authority — they are responsible as the secretary and the original classified — to make sure that all the information that flows through there is properly marked and classified. Obviously, Hillary didn’t do that. Also, they need to look — and I see these two points — at the original classification and the nondisclosure agreement that Hillary signed regarding classified information. They never get enough attention. And I would like to have seen Horowitz address those two issues in his report. To my knowledge, they are conspicuously absent. And — (garbled cell)

RUSH: Well, but Horowitz was not investigating her. He was not… Comey, FBI investigated her, and Comey exonerated her from dealing with classified material because she didn’t know what the circle C meant. She thought it meant “copy.” Horowitz was only investigating the FBI’s investigation of her in terms of whether there was, you know, bias or impropriety or what have you, but not on the guilt or innocence of Hillary. I don’t think he looked at that as his primary purview.

 

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2018/06/15/obama-was-the-reason-hillary-wasnt-prosecuted/

Should Christopher Wray Be Removed as IG for STILL Hiding Hillary FBI Gang Crimes?

I looked forward to this evening’s current FBI Director Christopher Wray’s  TV performance regarding the agency’s corruption among its leaders to secure the victory of notoriously crooked Hillary Clinton in her drive to defeat GOP candidate Donald J. Trump in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election.   Such conspiracies are usually confined  to fascist police state dictatorships rather than in our America.

I was hoping to hear a proper confession from Wray regarding modern FBI sins,  not the  burp of pretense from his presentation…..the pretense a few FBI folks made a mistake or two communicating their disdain for folks unHillary like and conspired to do something about it……

Citizen FBI Director Wray,   announces below his cleansing solution proudly and loudly.  He will direct for the future that ALL FBI personnel from top to bottom will be trained, indoctrinated into proper FBI “protocol” in the future….

Yet, there is no proof whatsoever that any but the top elite of the FBI itself, from then Director James Comey  and  at least a half dozen more the FBI ELITES who gathered to  corrupt the 2016 Presidential election with  FBI power to  guarantee the White House  for CROOKED HILLARY no matter what!

It was only a matter of time that our post-JudeoChristian America’s FBI might become as corrupt as the nation’s leftist  universities, schools, newspapers, and television industry, and the disappearance of so many American families.

Christopher Wray, however, performed for the most part as a functionary,  an excuse maker avoiding the damage done to today’s FBI truly devoted honest Americans who still believe in the glory of Truth over Evil.

Yet, I did notice a quiver or two on his face while lecturing to the public suggesting FBI bureaucratic superiority,  that he knew a cancerous tumor had been removed from the patient he and his fellow workers loved before the Hillary affair.

What do you think?

 

 

Why Isn’t Obstructionist, Rod Rosenstein, Sent to Siberia?

Rosenstein threatened to ‘subpoena’ GOP-led committee in ‘chilling’ clash over records, emails show

by Catherine Herridge  at Fox:

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein threatened to “subpoena” emails, phone records and other documents from lawmakers and staff on a Republican-led House committee during a tense meeting earlier this year, according to emails reviewed by Fox News documenting the encounter and reflecting what aides described as a “personal attack.”

The emails memorialized a January 2018 closed-door meeting involving senior FBI and Justice Department officials as well as members of the House Intelligence Committee. The account claimed Rosenstein threatened to turn the tables on the committee’s inquiries regarding the Russia probe.

“The DAG [Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein] criticized the Committee for sending our requests in writing and was further critical of the Committee’s request to have DOJ/FBI do the same when responding,” the committee’s then-senior counsel for counterterrorism Kash Patel wrote to the House Office of General Counsel. “Going so far as to say that if the Committee likes being litigators, then ‘we [DOJ] too [are] litigators, and we will subpoena your records and your emails,’ referring to HPSCI [House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] and Congress overall.”

A second House committee staffer at the meeting backed up Patel’s account, writing: “Let me just add that watching the Deputy Attorney General launch a sustained personal attack against a congressional staffer in retaliation for vigorous oversight was astonishing and disheartening. … Also, having the nation’s #1 (for these matters) law enforcement officer threaten to ‘subpoena your calls and emails’ was downright chilling.”

The committee staffer noted that Rosenstein’s comment could be interpreted as meaning the department would “vigorously defend a contempt action” — which might be expected. But the staffer continued, “I also read it as a not-so-veiled threat to unleash the full prosecutorial power of the state against us.”

Representatives with both the DOJ and FBI disputed the account in the emails.

“The FBI disagrees with a number of characterizations of the meeting as described in the excerpts of a staffer’s emails provided to us by Fox News,” the FBI said in a statement.

A DOJ official told Fox News that Rosenstein “never threatened anyone in the room with a criminal investigation.” The official said the department and bureau officials in the room “are all quite clear that the characterization of events laid out here is false,” adding that Rosenstein was responding to a threat of contempt.

‘[H]aving the nation’s #1 … law enforcement officer threaten to ‘subpoena your calls and emails’ was downright chilling.’

– House Intelligence Committee staffer, describing clash with Rod Rosenstein

“The Deputy Attorney General was making the point—after being threatened with contempt — that as an American citizen charged with the offense of contempt of Congress, he would have the right to defend himself, including requesting production of relevant emails and text messages and calling them as witnesses to demonstrate that their allegations are false,” the official said. “That is why he put them on notice to retain relevant emails and text messages, and he hopes they did so. (We have no process to obtain such records without congressional approval.)”

Further, the official said that when Rosenstein returns to the United States from a work trip, “he will request that the House General counsel conduct an internal investigation of these Congressional staffers’ conduct.”

Details of the January 2018 meeting first trickled out in the immediate aftermath. Fox News’ Gregg Jarrett tweeted in February on the purported subpoena threat.

But the emails, reviewed by Fox News, provide additional details about that encounter. A former Justice Department official said the account may help explain how the relationship between the DOJ and the Republican-led House committee has broken down in the months since.

“This is much worse than a deteriorating relationship – this is a massive breakdown in the system. A deputy attorney general does not make subpoena threats lightly. This is not the norm to say the least,” Tom Dupree, the former principal deputy assistant attorney general under the George W. Bush administration, told Fox News. “It’s hard to tell whether [Rosenstein] was sending a message to back off, or whether he was just trying to illustrate how invasive he considered the demands from Congress. But either way, it is a clear signal that the relationship is fractured, and it’s not clear how things will get repaired.”

The tense session over the boundaries of congressional oversight – and the Justice Department’s concern for protecting sources and methods – appears to have set the tone for a sustained records dispute as well as the latest confrontation over Chairman Devin Nunes’ request for information related to an alleged FBI confidential human source who was in contact with the Trump campaign.

A senior Justice Department official said Rosenstein and others have offered to meet Thursday with a group of House leaders known as the Gang of Eight. In a letter, Nunes, R-Calif. – whose staffers documented the Jan. 10 meeting – made clear he wants the records made available to all intelligence committee members and select staff two days earlier.

The Jan. 10 meeting came amid government surveillance abuse allegations, outstanding House subpoenas for Russia probe records and the looming threat of contempt. The Capitol Hill session pertained to a request for a sensitive document, according to the emails – and included Rosenstein, Associate Deputy Attorney General Scott Schools, Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Stephen Boyd, then-FBI Assistant Director Greg Brower and FBI Director Christopher Wray, as well as Nunes and three committee staffers.

The emails reviewed by Fox News show at least two committee staffers memorialized their concerns about the deputy attorney general’s alleged statements, at the request of the Office of General Counsel.

“I know I’ve relayed the following to you over the phone, and per your suggestion reducing it to writing so there is at least some record of the event,” wrote Patel, who is now the committee’s national security adviser.

The two staffers were pressed on whether Rosenstein could justify the comments as “merely referring to how DOJ would vigorously defend any litigation that the committee might initiate?” — an apparent reference to Nunes’ threat to hold Rosenstein and Wray in contempt for not providing records.

“I took … it as the DAG’s clearly articulated course of action should the committee continue its investigation in the current manner, which he found unacceptable and improper. It was not in response to how they would defend litigation (ie contempt or the like),” Patel responded. “It was about leaks, source contact, and other alleged disclosures by the committee.”

Asked about the January meeting, Nunes provided a statement to Fox News noting they referred the incident to House Speaker Paul Ryan’s office: “The Intelligence Committee considers staff concerns at the most serious level, especially those involving interactions with the executive branch. Based on the justified concerns expressed by our lead staff investigators, we referred this matter to the Speaker’s Office.”

Fox News provided extensive quotes from the emails and offered an opportunity to respond to all parties. The House Office of General Counsel declined to comment. A source close to the speaker said they “encouraged the Committee to work through the non-partisan DOJ Inspector General’s Office.”

A committee source said “going to DOJ IG is one of several steps under consideration.”

The DOJ official later said in an email that “no formal complaint was ever filed [with] the GC or IG.” The official also said that Rosenstein and Nunes “went to dinner with a mutual friend the night of this meeting and the chairman didn’t raise any concerns about the conversation at that dinner.”

Dupree, though, said the tensions between Congress and the Justice Department go well beyond the traditional oversight negotiations.

“Rarely, if ever, has it deterioriated to this point where you have what appears to be threats going back and forth between the two sides,” he said.

Fox News’ Pamela K. Browne and Cyd Upson contributed to this report. 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/12/rosenstein-threatened-to-subpoena-gop-led-committee-in-chilling-clash-over-records-emails-show.html

Culture Murders in Merkelville

ASYLUM SEEKER’S RAPE/MURDER ROILS GERMANY

by John  Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s policy of admitting into Germany hundreds of thousands of purported “refugees”–out of a misplaced sense of guilt, apparently–has been a disaster. The policy is appropriately unpopular, even more so following the latest outrage, the rape and murder of a 14 year old girl by an Iraqi whose plea for refugee status was turned down.

The New York Times reports, with surprising objectivity:

It was a gruesome murder: A 14-year-old girl was raped and strangled, her body buried under brushwood in a secluded area near the railway tracks near her hometown in western Germany.

But the fact that the chief suspect is an Iraqi asylum seeker has turned a terrible crime into political dynamite.

Most striking is the parallel between German and American immigration policies.

The murder suspect, identified as Ali Bashar, a 20-year-old Iraqi, arrived in Germany in October 2015, shortly after Ms. Merkel opened the borders to hundreds of thousands of migrants. He was rejected in late 2016, but was allowed to stay in the country while his appeal was pending.

“If he had been deported, she would still be alive,” read a headline in the country’s largest tabloid, Bild, which devoted two pages to the case.

He came to the attention of the police several times, involving allegations of jostling a police officer, robbing a passer-by and carrying a knife.

Here in the U.S., we have seen countless similar stories. Like Germany, we seem to lack the will to get rid of those who have no business being in our country, even when they commit multiple crimes.

Another parallel: the Germans have little control over their borders, as indicated by the fact that the murderer was able to flee the country, along with seven family members who apparently were untroubled by the fact that Bashar is a rapist and a murderer.

Last Saturday, he and seven other members of his family managed to flee the country, boarding a plane in Düsseldorf with papers apparently issued by the Iraqi Consulate but featuring false names, after paying cash for a one-way fare to Istanbul and then on to Iraq, where he has since been arrested.

While there are plenty of precedents for Bashar’s crimes, this one seems to have struck a chord with many Germans:

Critics of Ms. Merkel, led by the nativist Alternative for Germany party, now the largest opposition party, have been calling for a parliamentary inquiry into her migration policy. The proposal is gaining traction with other parties, too, and could threaten Ms. Merkel’s uneasy coalition with the Social Democrats.

On Thursday night, after reports of the killing, Alice Weidel, the deputy leader of the AfD, accused Ms. Merkel of sharing responsibility in the death of the girl, who has been identified by the authorities as Susanna Feldmann, and called for her entire cabinet to step down.

“Make way for an asylum policy that is built around law and order, so fathers and mothers in our country no longer need to be afraid for their children,” Ms. Weidel said in a video posted on Twitter.

“What do you say to the parents of the murdered #Susanna, Frau Merkel?” she tweeted later.

But there was plenty of outrage among centrist politicians, too. “Why was the perpetrator able to leave the country apparently under a false name?” asked Christian Lindner, the leader of the liberal Free Democrats, who has also expressed support for a parliamentary inquiry.

The Times saves a final gruesome detail for the conclusion of its story. The murderer Ali Bashar, who has now been apprehended in Iraq and reportedly has confessed, commandeered his victim’s cell phone to text the 14-year-old’s mother:

Susanna’s mother has been chronicling her daily anguish on Facebook since her daughter went missing on May 22.

The entry on June 1, a week after her daughter had disappeared, directly addressed Ms. Merkel.

“I turn to you with this cry for help because I feel abandoned by the German state as well as by our friend and helper (Police!!!),” the mother wrote.

The last text message she received from her daughter’s cellphone on May 23 was written in bad German. “Don’t look for me,” it said. “I come in 2 or 3 weeks.”

At that point Susanna was already dead.

Is the tide turning on illegal immigrant violence? That may be too much to hope for, but surprisingly, even the New York Times seems to have more sympathy for Susanna Feldmann and her family than for Susanna’s Islamic rapist/murderer. That is a welcome change.

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/06/asylum-seekers-rape-murder-roils-germany.php